# DISMISSED — B4-NOTCH — the skew stream's calendar notch, and the ≥400-row floor it put in question

status: dismissed by TRIAGE 2026-08-24 · **resolution: the floor is AFFIRMED BY SILENCE**, per the item's own pre-registered default · raised panel run 1 (2026-08-06) · body verbatim below

---

## Resolution — the item's own default fired today

**Killed because it resolved itself, exactly as designed.** The item pinned a
forcing function: *"The ≥400-row floor must be affirmed or amended,
countersigned, by a date pinned now, and in any case before the first
skew-vs-return computation. **Silence resolves to AFFIRM**."* Triage run 2
(2026-08-17) attached the date: unless the owner pinned an affirm-or-amend
date or amended the floor **by 2026-08-24**, run 3 records the floor as
AFFIRMED BY SILENCE and stops carrying it as a weekly decision.

**Verified today, 2026-08-24.** No commit since 2026-08-17 touches
`research/2026-08-01_b4_skew_activation_pin.md` (last touched 2026-08-14 by an
unrelated skew snapshot), the ≥400 floor at `:71` is unchanged, and no
affirm-or-amend date was pinned anywhere. Silence held for the full window.

**What is now on the record, and must survive to the 2027-06 first read:**

- The ≥ 400 valid-skew-rows floor **STANDS as registered**, affirmed by
  silence on 2026-08-24.
- **ISO week 27 (2026-06-29 … 2026-07-06) is skipped entirely** by the pinned
  primary statistic — six consecutive days at 283 valid rows, below the floor.
  That is **~11% of accrued weeks**, and it is **known-at-registration**, not
  a discovery to be made after seeing a return.
- The 283-name set was checked and cleared: byte-identical across all six days
  and a strict subset of the ~890-name set — a genuine calendar notch (only
  names with weeklies qualify), **not** a silent cap, and therefore not a
  sibling of CQA-1.
- The adjacent risk stands unexercised: the pin drops an observation when
  consecutive signal dates are more than 10 trading days apart, and the week-26
  observation chained 06-26 → 07-10 = exactly 10 td, on the boundary. A 7-day
  notch would have cost the adjacent observation too.

**Recorded here rather than in the pin memo on purpose.** The pin is
hash-frozen; appending to it would be the C0 breach the default exists to
avoid. This file plus git history is the durable record, and it is the record
the 2027-06 checkpoint should read alongside the pin.

**Reopens if:** (a) the owner countersigns an amendment to the ≥400 floor
**before** any skew-vs-return statistic is computed — affirm-by-silence closes
the weekly decision, it does not forbid a countersigned amendment ahead of the
first read; or (b) a second calendar notch destroys a further accrued week, so
that cumulative loss materially exceeds the ~11% recorded here; or (c) the
2027-06 checkpoint finds the floor is biting for a reason other than the
weeklies-only calendar effect cleared above.

---

## Body as raised (verbatim from the frozen archive)

**5. ⚠ EXPIRES · B4-NOTCH — the skew stream's calendar notch has already destroyed 1 of 9
accrued weeks of a hash-frozen test, and the option to say so expires.** ·
judgement: **YES** · effort 0.25 pd (memo only) · horizon: **pin a date now**

*Measured from owned committed data* (`data/options_skew.jsonl`, 42 dates):

```
ISOwk 27 (06-29…07-03):  283 283 283 283 283   ← all five below the 400 floor
2026-07-06:              283                    ← six consecutive days
2026-08-03:              281                    ← one-day notch
all other days:          888–897
```

B4's activation pin (`research/2026-08-01_b4_skew_activation_pin.md:71`)
requires ≥400 valid rows for a signal date, so **ISO week 27 is skipped
entirely by the pinned primary statistic** — ~11% of accrued weeks gone from an
already screen-grade test whose first read is 2027-06. The pin also drops an
observation when the gap between signal dates exceeds 10 trading days, and the
week-26 observation chained 06-26 → 07-10 = exactly 10 td, landing on the
boundary; a 7-day notch would cost the adjacent observation too.

*Checked and cleared:* the 283-name set is **byte-identical across all six
days** and a strict subset of the full 890-name set — exactly what "only names
with weeklies qualify" predicts. It is a genuine calendar notch, **not** a
silent cap, and therefore not a sibling of CQA-1.

*Kill criterion — a forcing function, because report-only means this resurfaces
in 2027-06 when amending is no longer possible without a C0 breach.* The
≥400-row floor must be **affirmed or amended, countersigned, by a date pinned
now, and in any case before the first skew-vs-return computation. Silence
resolves to AFFIRM** — pin stands, notch accepted, the ~11% loss recorded as
known-at-registration. Default-to-affirm is what stops the option being
exercised after someone has peeked at a return.

*Owner judgement required, and it is the only item here that expires.*